M1/NATO Standard/OT/RANT

[eclancy]

Gentlemen,
What is the US using NATO Standard Rifles and Ammo. NATO is just about dead. Germany and France as well as other members of NATO did not help when the Attack on 9/11 happened. Maybe I am wrong but I think that NATO countries were to come to the aid of a country in NATO was attacked. Only England and a few other small counties gave us some type of Military help. The US is thinking of going to a smaller round. I think the US should change the caliber but to a higher round and yes based on the M1 Garand and the M14. BY now we should be able to build a lighter and stronger rifle which should be based on the 30.06. Remember, the Stoner AR 15 and then the M16 only was about 6 lbs. By the time it was upgraded it was the same weight as the M1 Garand. I say WOOD and STEEL.
Thanks for reading the RANT
Clancy

 

[jefnvk]

I am going to go with cosmo on .308 over '06 on this one, if we were to develop a new weapon.

Maybe the Army should have just listened to Garand back when he wanted to go to the .276?

 

[yayarx7]

Wood on a modern military rifle would be like going back to flak jackets and LBSs. As much as I love wood and steel, they are not the best for the job. Same argument against 30-06, as great a cartridge as it is.

I am having trouble with the idea that a modern M4 weighs the same as the old Garand, even with all the goodies. Even if it did you would have to compare it to an equally loaded out M1. And even full loaded the M1 would be a poor choice for MOUT.

We do need a heavier round in a lighter weapon. Since we are designing a lighter, better than what we have available now rifle, I say we go with one of the new, better than what we have available now rounds. The Robinson Armament XCR in 6.8 looks promising.

I know it will never happen but 7.62x39 in a modern weapon would do just fine.

 

[Number 6]

NATO is just about dead.

A lot of the current literature on international institutions wonders why NATO is going so strong. NATO is far from dead, just because there are disagreements among the powers does not mean the institution is no longer effective. Also remember that NATO is currently operating in Afghanistan, amongst other operations.

 

[jefnvk]

I dunno about the wood. Seems to work just fine on the millions of AK's out there.

As for MOUT, I believe in specialization tools. Why use an M4 for everything, when you could just as easily supply them with a SMG or shotgun, much better suited for inside environments than even an M4.

 

[Malice]

You do not understand the part of NATO countries backing up other NATO countries when they are attacked because you do not understand that the US has not been "under attack" in a long time.

When they took down the OK. City building, should France have sent dudes someone over here to help us pick through the rubble?

I bet you think that because of the NATO treaty, France and Germany should have attacked Iraq with us.

Too bad Iraq never attacked us, and when they did show agression against the ally of a NATO country (Gulf War I), I seem to remember the use of the word "co-allition," a lot, and it actually meant something then.

And for what it is worth, the Europeans have their own terrorist problems, and they are fighting feverishly against them on their respective fronts, and it is my clar understanding that they co-operate with us in an Interpol kind of way.

Anyway, I have a Saiga in 7.62x39 and not a day goes by that I dont wish it didnt have a nice wood stock and bayo lug. A weapon of war needs to be tough, as in smashing skulls and spearing abdomens tough. Not to say I do not love that wonderfull rifle, but I would much prefer it had a wood stock, for cosmetic as well as very real practical reasons.

I realize that polymers are getting tougher everyday, and they are lighter. Maybe a rifle with a wood shoulder stock and polymer furniture would be a good thing. Ugly as hell though.

 

[atblis]

Synthetic materials are better

get over it.

The Garand was decent in its time, but outdated.

6.5 or 6.8 sounds good to me.

 

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

A rifle doesn't need to be stocked with wood in order to have "skull-crushing" levels of toughness. My FAL has a plastic stock, and I have absolutely no doubts about its rugedness and strength. I definitely wouldn't want someone to take a swing at me with it. The Garand is certainly prettier, though.


As for NATO neing dead, I just dunno. NATO members stood side by side to win Gulf War I, and forced Saddam to promise to demonstrably destroy his weapons. Yet France and Germany bailed on the rest of their allies when it came time to enforce the terms of that surrender agreement. It's the newer NATO nations like Hungary and Poland that are strong supporters of Gulf War II (outside of the US and UK).

So I guess the short version is that NATO is realigning itself. France and Germany have unofficially jumped ship and thrown their lot in with the EU. Former Wawsaw Pact nations are now strong supporters of NATO.

 

[cracked butt]

What can you expect of France? They bailed out on Poland in 1939 even though they had a mutual defense treaty with them. Great Brittain declared war on Germany as a result of the treaty and the invasion of Poland.

The more things change the more they stay the same.